Health policy and planning最新文献

Case management of malaria in Africa has evolved markedly over the past 20 years and updated cost estimates are needed to guide malaria control policies. We estimated the cost of malaria illness to households and the public health service and assessed the equity of these costs in Uganda. From December 2021 to May 2022, we conducted a costing exercise in eight government-run health centres covering seven sub-regions, collecting health service costs from patient observations, records review and a time-and-motion study. From November 2021 to January 2022, we gathered data on households' cost of illness from randomly selected households for 614 residents with suspected malaria. Societal costs of illness were estimated and combined with secondary data sources to estimate the total economic burden of malaria in Uganda. We used regression analyses and concentration curves to assess the equity of household costs across age, geographic location and socio-economic status. The mean societal economic cost of treating suspected malaria was $15.12 [95% confidence interval (CI): 12.83-17.14] per outpatient and $27.21 (95% CI: 20.43-33.99) per inpatient case. Households incurred 81% of outpatient and 72% of inpatient costs. Households bore nearly equal costs of illness, regardless of socio-economic status. A case of malaria cost households in the lowest quintile 26% of per capita monthly consumption, while a malaria case only cost households in the highest quintile 8%. We estimated the societal cost of malaria treatment in Uganda was $577 million (range: $302 million-1.09 billion) in 2021. The cost of malaria remains high in Uganda. Households bear the major burden of these costs. Poorer and richer households incur the same costs per case; this distribution is equal, but not equitable. These results can be applied to parameterize future economic evaluations of malaria control interventions and to evaluate the impact of malaria on Ugandan society, informing resource allocations in malaria prevention.

Governments in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are increasingly considering the introduction of national health insurance scheme (NHIS) as a strategy to achieve universal health coverage (UHC) targets. The literature has widely documented the technical challenges associated with implementing UHC policies in LMICs but much less is known about the political process necessary to pass UHC legislation. In this article, we document the political economy issues surrounding the establishment of the Zambia NHIS in 2018. We adapted a political economy framework incorporating, semi-structured interviews with diverse stakeholders and document analysis of policies, operational reports and legislatures from 1991 and 2018. Our findings show the 26-year journey towards the establishment of the NHIS in Zambia involved a long sequence of policy dialogue, technical review and stakeholder engagement. Our interviews with key stakeholders suggest that the act was eventually passed due to strong political will and dominant leadership of the Ministry of Health. Passing the law required trade-offs between choices influenced by stakeholder pressures and recommendations from research and actuarial studies. Another equally critical factor was the high public support and legacies of past policies, such as the removal of user fees that had created quality gaps and inequities in the health system. Furthermore, global ideas about UHC and initiatives implemented by other countries also generated support for Zambia's NHIS. Overall, this study highlights the complex set of political economy factors that need to align in order for governments to be able to adopt health insurance in low-income settings. We show that political leadership and commitment to getting reforms passed is crucial. We also highlight how certain narratives about countries in the global health sphere can shape policies in other countries.

The Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) system was adopted by the Sierra Leone Ministry of Health (MOH) in 2008, which was based on paper-based tools for health data recording and reporting from health facilities to the national level. The Sierra Leone MoH introduced the implementation of electronic case-based disease surveillance reporting of immediately notifiable diseases. This study aims to document and describe the experience of Sierra Leone in transforming her paper-based disease surveillance system into an electronic disease surveillance system. Retrospective mixed methods of qualitative and quantitative data were reviewed. Qualitative data were collected by reviewing surveillance technical reports, epidemiological bulletins, COVID-19, IDSR technical guidelines, Digital Health strategy and DHIS2 documentation. Content and thematic data analyses were performed for the qualitative data, while Microsoft Excel and DHIS2 platform were used for the quantitative data analysis to document the experience of Sierra Leone in digitalizing its disease surveillance system. In the early 2017, a web-based electronic Case-Based Disease Surveillance (eCBDS) for real-time reporting of immediately notifiable diseases and health threats was piloted using the District Health Information System 2 (DHIS2) software. The eCBDS integrates case profile, laboratory, and final outcome data. All captured data and information are immediately accessible to users with the required credentials. The system can be accessed via a browser or an Android DHIS2 application. By 2021, there was a significant increase in the proportion of immediately notifiable cases reported through the facility-level electronic platform, and more than 80% of the cases reported through the weekly surveillance platform had case-based data in eCBDS. Case-based data from the platform are analysed and disseminated to stakeholders for public health decision-making. Several outbreaks of Lassa fever, Measles, vaccine-derived Polio and Anthrax have been tracked in real-time through the eCBDS.

Gender impacts exposure and vulnerability to tuberculosis (TB) evidenced by a higher prevalence of both TB disease and missed TB diagnoses among men, who significantly contribute to new TB infections. We present the formative research phase of a study, which used participatory methods to identify gender-specific interventions for systematic screening of TB among men in Uganda. Health facility-level data were collected at four Ugandan general hospitals (Kawolo, Gombe, Mityana and Nakaseke) among 70 TB stakeholders, including healthcare workers, TB survivors, policymakers and researchers. Using health-seeking pathways, they delineated and compared men's ideal and actual step-by-step TB health-seeking processes to identify barriers to TB care. The stepping stones method, depicting barriers as a 'river' and each 'steppingstone' as a solution, was employed to identify interventions which would help link men with TB symptoms to care. These insights were then synthesized in a co-analysis meeting with 17 participants, including representatives from each health facility to develop a consensus on proposed interventions. Data across locations revealed the actual TB care pathway diverted from the ideal pathway due to health system, community, health worker and individual-level barriers such as delayed health seeking, unfavourable facility operating hours and long waiting times that conflicted with men's work schedules. Stakeholders proposed to address these barriers through the introduction of male-specific services; integrated TB services that prioritize X-ray screening for men with cough; healthcare worker training modules on integrated male-friendly services; training and supporting TB champions to deliver health education to people seeking care; and engagement of private practitioners to screen for TB. In conclusion, our participatory co-design approach facilitated dialogue, learning and consensus between different health actors on context-specific, person-centred TB interventions for men in Uganda. The acceptability, effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the package will now be evaluated in a pilot study.

The need for leadership within district health systems is critical for the effective delivery of services and for inter-sectoral collaboration for health. Leadership capacity development (LCD) has not, however, been prioritized within health systems, and the systemic capacity (i.e. roles, structures and processes) that is needed to develop managers who can lead is not always in place. This paper aims to contribute to understanding how to build such capacity, considering a relevant bottom-up innovation. We observed, in the period 2013-15, the emergent implementation of this innovation (a 'Leadership Commission') in a South African health district. What started out as an effort to train individual leaders evolved into the development of systemic capacity for LCD. We adopted realist evaluation as the main methodological approach, as well as case study design, and we first developed a programme theory of the internally driven LCD initiative, through a round of interviews with senior managers. We then tested the programme theory drawing on 14 in-depth interviews and field notes of meetings and processes. Our analysis suggests that building systemic capacity for LCD requires leadership to be expressed as a strategic priority by those with positional authority and that bottom-up LCD requires institutional commitment through strengthening routine structures or creating new ones. The ability to leverage existing resources is another key element of systemic capacity. The mechanisms that enable bottom-up capacity development include tacit and experiential knowledge, sensemaking, systems thinking and trust between, and motivation of, those tasked with leading LCD. Leadership development is constrained by increased workloads for those involved as the prioritization of leadership becomes simply an additional task, and sustainability challenges are likely in the absence of additional resources for bottom-up innovation.

Two billion people globally lack access to a basic toilet, and sanitation is a critical determinant of health and well-being. Evaluations of sanitation programmes typically measure disease or behaviour, and visual analogue scales (VASs) have not been used to measure users' feelings about their level of sanitation. In this study, we assess the validity of a horizontal sanitation VAS numbered 0-10, with end anchors 'best imaginable' and 'worst imaginable' sanitation. In Kumasi, Ghana, we surveyed 291 participants before and after uptake of a container-based sanitation service. In Maputo, Mozambique, we surveyed 424 participants from treatment groups of a prior trial. We assessed construct validity by testing hypothesized associations between VAS scores and toilet characteristics and by respondents valuing three hypothetical sanitation states. We assessed responsiveness by comparing VAS with/without sanitation interventions. There was evidence (P < 0.05) for 60% of hypothesized associations in Ghana and 100% in Mozambique. For responsiveness, there was a 3.4-point increase (2.1 SD) in VAS 10 weeks post-intervention in Ghana and a 2.9 point difference (1.3 SD) in Mozambique. In valuation exercises, the mean was higher (P < 0.001) for the objectively better sanitation state. The sanitation VAS could be useful in economic evaluation to identify which improvements achieve quality-of-life gains most efficiently. For future studies, we recommend a vertical sanitation VAS numbered 0-100 with emojis at end anchors but retaining a 0-10 option for those who struggle with numeracy.

Farm workers are vulnerable working populations who face significant inequalities in accessing health services, including those for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention, treatment and care. This descriptive phenomenological study aimed to explore farm workers' experiences when accessing HIV services and was conducted in Limpopo province, South Africa. Eighteen in-depth interviews were conducted in four health facilities from two districts, and two focus group discussions were conducted in one of the farms within the province. Purposive sampling and systematic random sampling were used to select study participants. A deductive thematic approach was used to analyse data, informed by the social-ecological model of health. The results reveal that farm workers perceive multiple interdependent factors that inhibit or enable their access to HIV healthcare services. Key barriers to HIV healthcare were transport affordability, health worker attitudes, stigma and discrimination, models of HIV healthcare delivery, geographic location of health facilities and difficult working conditions. Key facilitators to HIV healthcare included the availability of mobile health services, the presence of community health workers and a supportive work environment. The findings suggest disparities in farm workers' access to HIV services, with work being the main determinant of access. We, therefore, recommend a review of HIV policies and programmes for the agricultural sector and models of HIV healthcare delivery that address the unique needs of farm workers.